Slashdot Mirror
Making the Switch To Windows "Workstation" 2008
snydeq writes "Disenchanted with Vista? Why not convert Windows Server 2008 into the lean, efficient, reliable 'power user' OS that Windows should be? InfoWorld's Randall Kennedy, who has been using a converted 'Workstation' 2008 as his primary OS since hitting a wall using Vista as a Visual Studio development platform four months ago, says the guerrilla OS has turned his Dell notebook into a well-oiled machine that never gets sluggish and rarely needs to reboot. Those interested in making the switch should check out win2008workstation.com, a clearinghouse for 'Workstation' 2008 tips and techniques. Kennedy also offers a link to a Windows 2008 Workstation Converter utility for those looking to quickly convert a fresh Server 2008 install without hacking the registry or manually installing/enabling lots of services and features."
A Windows install without all the needless bells and whistles runs nicely. Who'd have thunk it. Well, many consumers thunk it, but Microsoft's marketing demagogues didn't.
IMO, Vista is Microsoft's version of New Coke or the Arch Deluxe (if any of you are old enough to remember them). Although the same could have been said about Windows ME.
Maybe Windows is like Star Trek movies... only every other release is good.
Start a happiness pandemic
You can double the cost of your $700 PC.
I Am My Own Worst Enemy
this is true, windows 2008 is awesome. i converted to it from vista and i never get the spinning circle anymore. its just snappier.
.inf driver files and manually install through device manager. although if you're installing windows server you probably can do that stuff no sweat. i highly recommend windows 2008
one thing to note, its kind of a bitch to get drivers working. vista drivers work fine but you'll have to open those driver installers with an archive utility, pull out the
-mr silver
how much more is Win2k8 than vista... I mean unless of course you are ARRRGH! pirates...for god sakes Win2k8 is going to be cost prohibitive as a desktop os for the vast majority of people.
actually I am happy to see you, however that is in fact a banana in my pocket.
OEM Vista Home Basic $105
OEM Vista Home Premium $136
OEM Vista Business $166
OEM Vista Ultimate $229
OEM Vista Workstation (AKA 2008 server) $1090
Wow, that's quite a markup for a workstation OS!
(All prices in AU$)
Why not run a decent 'Workstation' OS like Solaris or Linux? If you want a 'home PC', Vista is fine, but Windows is not a 'Workstation' OS, and it never was.
Meh.
http://www.zombieapocalypse.tv/
It's a free download on Microsoft's website, good for a 60-day trial, extendable to 240 days. I'm a diehard Linux user, but I actually was pleasantly surprised when I tried it (not enough to keep it around, but it's probably my favorite Windows). Relatively snappy, PowerShell is built in, and no DRM crap. It's what should've been released as Windows Vista, IMO.
The author of the article mentioned he was setting a a Visual Studio development environment, which probably means he is a MSDN subscriber, which gives him rights to pretty much all of Microsoft's software for development purposes. So to someone who has the full MSDN subscription, or even just the OS portion, this is a no additional cost option: they have already paid for it.
I'm going to go back in my box and will think within the limits of my box: MS Sucks Linux Good I read too much Slashdot.
I got Windows Server 2008 free at the LA launch, so I figured I'd give it a go. I installed it and quickly changed everything to function as a desktop. Then I switched back. Here's why:
The experience is definitely not a simple "setup windows, modify windows, use as normal" one. Most of the random things that screw up are fixable, but just too much of a pain in the ass and ultimately a waste of time.
Server *can* run faster than Vista, but only because various artificial limits are raised or removed. Most developers work around these limits and most are very good at it, so I doubt any non-developers would ever notice any performance difference. If you're looking to speed up Vista, find one of the various sites that list descriptions of services and which are safe to turn off. Most of the "bloat" of Vista can be turned off through that.
Many off the shelf antivirus programs will not install on any of the Server series of OSes. They flat out refuse because they want you to buy their more expensive server version...
Windows 2000 wasn't the "server" OS.
Windows 2000 was the business OS. It came in Professional desktop versions and various Server versions.
1. Visit www.getfirefox.com
2. Download FF3
3. Install FF3
4. Click a dozen or so security warnings in the process.
5. Never look back.
db
I am literally 3000 tokens away from the chaotic crossbow --Stephen
That's because, for all intents and purposes, it is server 2003.
Wikipedia
Of course, Win 98 and Win 2K were radically different kernels.
Vista SP1 and Windows Server 2008 are the *SAME* kernel
As was said upthread, if want you want is a workstation that doesn't use all the Vista services, it's easier and cheaper to just turn off the services you don't want :).
My video compression blog
The sound system is screwy. Priorities are setup for different workloads, resulting in pops and hisses when you play music. This is fixable, but took me a while to figure out how and I still never seemed to get it perfect.
I'm running Server 2008 as my main box, and I haven't seen this problem.
I did see the first one though (the incompatibilities) with both AVG and Avast! anti-virus; both seem to assume that since I'm installing it on the server OS it's not being used on a home, non-commercial desktop and tell you to buy the full version.
So what you are saying is that the natural Windows updrade path is Vista -> Windows 2008 Server -> XP?